Pennsylvania

[Hwy 61 Revisited]

Just drove over it Sat night around sunset.  I really like the PA 462 bridge.

Also a fan of the PA 441 Columbia realignment/"bypass" they did a decade or so ago.

Why isn't old 441 called 441 Bus.? It just makes sense!

[74/171FAN]

Just drove over it Sat night around sunset.  I really like the PA 462 bridge.

Also a fan of the PA 441 Columbia realignment/"bypass" they did a decade or so ago.

Why isn't old 441 called 441 Bus.? It just makes sense!

The intent of the bypass (opened in 2015) was to keep trucks out of Downtown Columbia.  A business route would not have done a good job of that. Besides PennDOT seems to prefer not to use them unless a municipality wants it.

[Alps]

Just drove over it Sat night around sunset.  I really like the PA 462 bridge.

Also a fan of the PA 441 Columbia realignment/"bypass" they did a decade or so ago.

Why isn't old 441 called 441 Bus.? It just makes sense!

The intent of the bypass (opened in 2015) was to keep trucks out of Downtown Columbia.  A business route would not have done a good job of that. Besides PennDOT seems to prefer not to use them unless a municipality wants it.

I feel like Bypass is a misnomer. It's a reroute around downtown, similar to PA 611 in Easton.

[jmacswimmer]

Doing some GSV-exploring around Wilkes-Barre and came across what appears to be a closed left-turn from the ending PA 115 North to the I-81 South onramp.  Does anyone know when/why this was closed?  I imagine it was safety related?

[Hwy 61 Revisited]

Doing some GSV-exploring around Wilkes-Barre and came across what appears to be a closed left-turn from the ending PA 115 North to the I-81 South onramp.  Does anyone know when/why this was closed?  I imagine it was safety related?

I think it was due to a car crash, but also to make the whole NCVE an expressway throughout.

[briantroutman]

According to various historic aerial photos I could find, the left-turn access from PA 115 North to the I-81 South on-ramp was closed at some point in the '90s. It was still intact in 1992 but blocked by 1999. I couldn't find a contemporary accounting of when it was closed (or precisely why), but as Hwy 61 suggested, it was apparently following a significant collision. Here's an excerpt from a 2012 Citizens' Voice article on various Wyoming Valley highway topics that mentioned the ramp:

At one time, a left turn was allowed off Route 115, but that required crossing two lanes of the highway. A tragic fatal accident there led to closing the left-turn ramp. The key question is: why didn't the original I-81 interchange include a cloverleaf flyover or underpass to ease this access?

The answer to the article's "key question"  is, I believe, obvious. When this interchange was originally constructed in the 1960s (and provided access to arterial PA 115 rather than the PA 309 freeway that exists there today), there was virtually zero development on PA 115 immediately south (east) of I-81. This ramp provided I-81 SB access for the relatively few homes in the Bear Creek area, but otherwise, it was virtually superfluous. And assumably, the PDH decided that traffic volumes would be low enough so that the left turn would not cause considerable congestion or an unreasonable safety hazard.

But decades later, after the construction (and expansion) of the sprawling Geisinger campus, a Social Security Administration building, other office buildings, an apartment complex, a Holiday Inn, and other businesses, that's certainly not the case. I suppose motorists need to backtrack to Juniper Road, turn south on PA 315, then get onto PA 309 South in order to get to I-81 SB.

[74/171FAN]

But decades later, after the construction (and expansion) of the sprawling Geisinger campus, a Social Security Administration building, other office buildings, an apartment complex, a Holiday Inn, and other businesses, that's certainly not the case. I suppose motorists need to backtrack to Juniper Road, turn south on PA 315, then get onto PA 309 South in order to get to I-81 SB.

FTFY.

[briantroutman]

But decades later, after the construction (and expansion) of the sprawling Geisinger campus, a Social Security Administration building, other office buildings, an apartment complex, a Holiday Inn, and other businesses, that's certainly not the case. I suppose motorists need to backtrack to Juniper Road, turn south on PA 315, then get onto PA 309 South in order to get to I-81 SB.

FTFY.

A typo.

[Hwy 61 Revisited]

When I-81 inevitably gets reconstructed, I hope Exit 190 is turned into a turbine interchange or something to that effect, as right now Route 309 exits via a loop rather than a flyover.

[storm2k]

Would I be correct in assuming that this signage was erected and is maintained by the DRJTBC and not PennDOT? It doesn't look like any sort of PennDOT spec. In fact, it looks more like an approximation of NJDOT's spec for destination signage than anything else. I assume that whole underpass is DRJTBC as the pavement is different from the surrounding street grid?

[Flyer78]

The answer to the article's "key question"  is, I believe, obvious. When this interchange was originally constructed in the 1960s (and provided access to arterial PA 115 rather than the PA 309 freeway that exists there today), there was virtually zero development on PA 115 immediately south (east) of I-81. This ramp provided I-81 SB access for the relatively few homes in the Bear Creek area, but otherwise, it was virtually superfluous. And assumably, the PDH decided that traffic volumes would be low enough so that the left turn would not cause considerable congestion or an unreasonable safety hazard.

I think it is the last line of the snippet above; that is key (assumed traffic values would be acceptable).   In addition to the other growth you mentioned, the areas around the mall expanded (eventually led to the construction of Exit 46/168) to serve the (then new and now named) Mohegan Sun Arena and new retail complexes. If my memory is right, this completed around 2000 or so (I remember it had opened just before the roll-out of mileage based numbering)  The aerials from 1999 show it still under construction.

I remember the Red Roof Inn had its access (and likely address) moved to 315, which explains its access (and orientation towards the expressway) today. Valley Crest Nursing Home also had access to/from what is now the NCVE. The new expressway was lowered considerably to allow for the 315 overpass over 309/NCVE.

Traffic from Geisinger is routed a different path to get to 81S via East Mountain Rd, Jumper Road, 315S. (saves the loop now required via Exit 1). A further annoyance is that interchange does not allow right on red from either lane of the exit. (https://goo.gl/maps/Wzm1GHPEBiK1NCTr6)

PennDOT just swapped the overhead signs on 115S, (https://goo.gl/maps/gDjQ96zTWdbk6r4N7) and applied a green-out over what I believe was an Exit Only panel (or, being PA, perhaps THIS LANE) to the left turn lane.

One complication is access from the Turnpike, which is a few miles up the hill on 115S, now requires either going via the above mentioned East Mountain Rd to Jumper Rd, or through Exit 1, to access 81S (for AHL/Arena events, shopping, etc.) Many national retailers are located along the hub as the only location in the Wyoming Valley... Of course, this may all change again as online retail replaces in-person pickup.

[storm2k]

Something I've always been curious about. Who's responsible for the street name blades you see attached to traffic signals in PA? They always seem to use weirdly spaced or proportioned fonts, and not always FHWA Gothic or Clearview. I would have thought if it was PennDOT, they'd use standard fonts for it.

[MASTERNC]

Something I've always been curious about. Who's responsible for the street name blades you see attached to traffic signals in PA? They always seem to use weirdly spaced or proportioned fonts, and not always FHWA Gothic or Clearview. I would have thought if it was PennDOT, they'd use standard fonts for it.

Think it's the townships, as they don't even all use the same background color (normally green or blue).

[Crown Victoria]

Something I've always been curious about. Who's responsible for the street name blades you see attached to traffic signals in PA? They always seem to use weirdly spaced or proportioned fonts, and not always FHWA Gothic or Clearview. I would have thought if it was PennDOT, they'd use standard fonts for it.

Think it's the townships, as they don't even all use the same background color (normally green or blue).

The recent rehabilitation of PA 61 in Ontelaunee Twp. and Perry Twp. in Berks County included upgraded signals with signs in the standard FHWA font.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5024169,-75.9636539,3a,75y,22.2h,95.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTNdQcp4Pcqzg4K60pVC6yw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Whether the choice of font is PennDOT's or a local municipality's, I don't know. From my personal observation a lot of recent installations are either in Highway Gothic or Clearview.

[Flyer78]

Another item I noticed is that single line signs have borders, two line signs, do not.

[tylert120]

Those signs are the responsibility of the municipality. But if PennDot is replacing the signs as part of a signal upgrade then they will typically be clearview.

[webny99]

Does anyone have any insight as to what is going on at the northern end of I-476, near the final toll barrier where it meets US 11 and I-81?

[Roadsguy]

Does anyone have any insight as to what is going on at the northern end of I-476, near the final toll barrier where it meets US 11 and I-81?

The PA Turnpike Northeast Extension was originally intended to extend further north. Before the Interstate system, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission planned a number of Turnpike extensions much like the Northeast Extension connecting to various areas of the state. When the Interstate system was first proposed, these were scrapped and incorporated into planned Interstate corridors (more info on the PA Highways page). One of these proposals was extending the Northeast Extension further from its then-temporary end at US 11 along what's now the I-81 corridor to the NY state line. (I don't know what it would have connected to on the other side; perhaps a Thruway extension down from Syracuse?) Obviously this never happened and I-81 was built instead, but all that was ever changed of the "temporary" terminus was squeezing in a double-trumpet with I-81 just past the toll plaza.

You can even still see the stubs for the northbound (very visible) and southbound (mostly buried under gravel now) carriageways that would have diverged from the present alignment, which was meant to only be the northbound exit ramp. There were even once stubs at the sharp curve for the trumpet loop and northbound on-ramp, but these were removed at some point.

It would have looked something like this:


There is a project in the works to redesign this interchange and provide direct, high-speed ramps to and from I-81 to the north (and to do similar where the two routes meet again south of Scranton). The PTC has a project website for it.

[Flyer78]

They appear to be replacing the bridge over Edella Rd.(https://goo.gl/maps/7pP9e9wGGWEW48Xe8)

Per the Turnpike's construction site it is not a part of the proposed Scranton Beltway.

...a totally independent project to address the Edella Road bridge. Being in poor condition, this bridge is to be replaced starting spring 2019. This bridge replacement project is not part of the Scranton Beltway project, but is part of the Commission's statewide program to address structurally deficient bridges.

Spring 2019, right on (Turnpike) Time...

[vdeane]

There is a project in the works to redesign this interchange and provide direct, high-speed ramps to and from I-81 to the north (and to do similar where the two routes meet again south of Scranton). The PTC has a project website for it.

I found some interchange diagrams in the study document.  It's a bit more low-key than I would have expected from a project calling itself the "Scranton Beltway".
https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/library/2015_12-Feasibility-Study-II.pdf

[SGwithADD]

I found some interchange diagrams in the study document.  It's a bit more low-key than I would have expected from a project calling itself the "Scranton Beltway".
https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/library/2015_12-Feasibility-Study-II.pdf

You're right. Huh.

I'm also surprised by the fact that they're building this despite such low traffic estimates (< 5000 vehicles shifted to the beltway).  I think the project is long overdue (especially given the PTC's hatred/cheapness with regards to direct connections), but I would've expected a bit larger number.

[Hwy 61 Revisited]

I found some interchange diagrams in the study document.  It's a bit more low-key than I would have expected from a project calling itself the "Scranton Beltway".
https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/library/2015_12-Feasibility-Study-II.pdf

You're right. Huh.

I'm also surprised by the fact that they're building this despite such low traffic estimates (< 5000 vehicles shifted to the beltway).  I think the project is long overdue (especially given the PTC's hatred/cheapness with regards to direct connections), but I would've expected a bit larger number.

There would be a bigger number if they built more interchanges and waived tolls.

[DrSmith]

Based on a quick look at street view (and admittedly not reading the report), 3 additional potential benefits I can see are:
1. Removing sharp loops, particularly as you come to the end of the NE Ext prior to the toll plaza. Is there a problem with accidents here?
2. Trying to go south from 81 onto the PATP NE Ext, the ramp has a stop sign and a short weave before the toll plaza. This issue would be removed.
3. Entering onto 81 North it appears to be climbing, so you would remove the issue of dumping low speed trucks coming off yet another loop and then working to pick up speed going uphill.

[jeffandnicole]

I found some interchange diagrams in the study document.  It's a bit more low-key than I would have expected from a project calling itself the "Scranton Beltway".
https://www.patpconstruction.com/scrantonbeltway/library/2015_12-Feasibility-Study-II.pdf

You're right. Huh.

I'm also surprised by the fact that they're building this despite such low traffic estimates (< 5000 vehicles shifted to the beltway).  I think the project is long overdue (especially given the PTC's hatred/cheapness with regards to direct connections), but I would've expected a bit larger number.

There would be a bigger number if they built more interchanges and waived tolls.

And then they wouldn't have the money to make the improvements.

[Roadrunner75]

From just looking at the project design alternative exhibits it doesn't look like they are helping it be much of a "beltway" in terms of easier movements to circulate around Scranton.  It looks more like it just helps 476 become a more direct bypass for 81 - picking up some tolls in the process - and sending through traffic on 81 in both directions west of the city instead.  Otherwise you're still stuck with the existing ramp system.  Of course the report narrative probably says as such, but I got things to do and I go right for the pretty pictures.  Better than nothing though.